Abstract
The philosophical conception of mechanistic explanation is grounded on a limited number of canonical examples. These examples provide an overly narrow view of contemporary scientific practice, because they do not reflect the extent to which the heuristic strategies and descriptive practices that contribute to mechanistic explanation have evolved beyond the well-known methods of decomposition, localization, and pictorial representation. Recent examples from evolutionary robotics and network approaches to biology and neuroscience demonstrate the increasingly important role played by computer simulations and mathematical representations in the epistemic practices of mechanism discovery and mechanism description. These examples also indicate that the scope of mechanistic explanation must be re-examined: With new and increasingly powerful methods of discovery and description comes the possibility of describing mechanisms far more complex than traditionally assumed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abrahamsen, A., & Bechtel, W. (2006). Phenomena and mechanisms: Putting the symbolic, connectionist, and dynamical systems debate in broader perspective. In R. J. Stainton (Ed.), Contemporary debates in cognitive science (pp. 159–185). Oxford: Blackwell.
Baetu, T. (2015). From mechanisms to mathematical models and back to mechanisms: Quantitative mechanistic explanations. In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 345–363). Dordrecht: Springer.
Banks, E., Nabieva, E., Chazelle, B., & Singh, M. (2008). Organization of physical interactomes as uncovered by network schemas. PLoS Computational Biology, 4(10), e1000203. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000203.
Bargmann, C. I., & Horvitz, H. R. (1991). Chemosensory neurons with overlapping functions direct chemotaxis to multiple chemicals in C. elegans. Neuron, 7(5), 729–742.
Bechtel, W. (2006). Discovering cell mechanisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bechtel, W. (2008). Mental mechanisms: Philosophical perspectives on cognitive neuroscience. London: Routledge.
Bechtel, W. (2015). Generalizing mechanistic explanations using graph-theoretic representations. In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 199–225). Dordrecht: Springer.
Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. (2005). Explanation: A mechanist alternative. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36(2), 421–441. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2005.03.010.
Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. (2010). Dynamic mechanistic explanation: Computational modeling of circadian rhythms as an exemplar for cognitive science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 41(3), 321–333. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.07.003.
Bechtel, W., & Richardson, R. C. (1993). Discovering complexity: Decomposition and localization as strategies in scientific research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Beer, R. D. (2003). The dynamics of active categorical perception in an evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior, 11(4), 209–243. doi:10.1177/1059712303114001; discussion 244–305.
Braillard, P.-A. (2015). Prospect and limits of explaining biological systems in engineering terms. In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 319–344). Dordrecht: Springer.
Brigandt, I. (2015). Evolutionary developmental biology and the limits of philosophical accounts of mechanistic explanation. In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 135–173). Dordrecht: Springer.
Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chemero, A., & Silberstein, M. (2008). After the philosophy of mind: Replacing scholasticism with science. Philosophy of Science, 75(1), 1–27. doi:10.1086/587820.
Craver, C. F. (2006). When mechanistic models explain. Synthese, 153(3), 355–376. doi:10.1007/s11229-006-9097-x.
Craver, C. F. (2007). Explaining the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Craver, C. F. (2008). Physical law and mechanistic explanation in the Hodgkin and Huxley model of the action potential. Philosophy of Science, 75, 1022–1033.
Craver, C. F. (2013). Functions and mechanisms: A perspectivalist view. In P. Huneman (Ed.), Functions: Selection and mechanisms. Dordrecht: Springer.
Cummins, R. (1983). The nature of psychological explanation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gigerenzer, G. (1991). From tools to theories: A heuristic of discovery in cognitive psychology. Psychological Review, 98(2), 254–267.
Glauer, R. (2012). Emergent mechanism: Reductive explanation for limited beings. Mentis: Münster.
Glennan, S. (2002). Rethinking mechanistic explanation. Philosophy of Science, 69(S3), S342–S353. doi:10.1086/341857.
Harvey, I., di Paolo, E. A., Tuci, E., Wood, R., & Quinn, M. (2005). Evolutionary robotics: A new scientific tool for studying cognition. Artificial Life, 11, 79–98.
Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press.
Hubel, D., & Wiesel, T. (1959). Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat’s striate cortex. Journal of Physiology, 148, 574–591.
Hubel, D., & Wiesel, T. (1968). Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. Journal of Physiology, 195, 215–243.
Iino, Y., & Yoshida, K. (2009). Parallel use of two behavioral mechanisms for chemotaxis in Caenorhabditis elegans. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(17), 5370–5380.
Issad, T., & Malaterre, C. (2015). Are dynamic mechanistic explanations still mechanistic? In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 265–292). Dordrecht: Springer.
Izquierdo, E. J., & Beer, R. D. (2013). Connecting a connectome to behavior: An ensemble of neuroanatomical models of C. elegans Klinotaxis. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(2), e1002890. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002890.
Izquierdo, E. J., & Lockery, S. R. (2010). Evolution and analysis of minimal neural circuits for klinotaxis in Caenorhabditis elegans. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(39), 12908–12917. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2606-10.2010.
Kaplan, D. M. (2011). Explanation and description in computational neuroscience. Synthese, 183, 339–373. doi:10.1007/s11229-011-9970-0.
Kaplan, D. M. (2012). How to demarcate the boundaries of cognition. Biology & Philosophy. doi:10.1007/s10539-012-9308-4.
Kaplan, D. M., & Craver, C. F. (2011). The explanatory force of dynamical and mathematical models in neuroscience: A mechanistic perspective. Philosophy of Science, 78, 601–627.
Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kocabas, A., Shen, C. H., Guo, Z. V., & Ramanathan, S. (2012). Controlling interneuron activity in Caenorhabditis elegans to evoke chemotactic behaviour. Nature, 940, 273–277.
Leuridan, B. (2011). Three problems for the mutual manipulability account of constitutive relevance in mechanisms. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 63(2), 399–427. doi:10.1093/bjps/axr036.
Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67(1), 1–25.
Marr, D., & Hildreth, E. (1980). Theory of edge detection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 207(1167), 187–217.
Mekios, C. (2015). Explanation in systems biology: Is it all about mechanisms? In P.-A. Braillard & C. Malaterre (Eds.), Explanation in biology. An enquiry into the diversity of explanatory patterns in the life sciences (pp. 47–72). Dordrecht: Springer.
Mitchell, M. (1996). An introduction to genetic algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schlitt, T., & Brazma, A. (2007). Current approaches to gene regulatory network modelling. BMC Bioinformatics, 8(Supplement 6), S9. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-S6-S9.
Silberstein, M., & Chemero, A. (2013). Constraints on localization and decomposition as explanatory strategies in the biological sciences. Philosophy of Science, 80(5), 958–970.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Spencer, J. P., & Schöner, G. (2006). An embodied approach to cognitive systems: A dynamic neural field theory of spatial working memory. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2180–2185), Vancouver.
Suzuki, H., Thiele, T. R., Faumont, S., Ezcurra, M., Lockery, S. R., & Schafer, W. R. (2008). Functional asymmetry in Caenorhabditis elegans taste neurons and its computational role in chemotaxis. Nature, 454(7200), 114–117. doi:10.1038/nature06927.
Varshney, L. R., Chen, B. L., Paniagua, E., Hall, D. H., & Chklovskii, D. B. (2011). Structural properties of the Caenorhabditis elegans neuronal network. PLoS Computational Biology, 7(2), e1001066.
Webb, B. (2009). Animals versus animats: Or why not model the real iguana? Adaptive Behavior, 17(4), 269–286. doi:10.1177/1059712309339867.
Wheeler, M. (2005). Reconstructing the cognitive world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
White, J. G., Southgate, E., Thomson, J. N., & Brenner, S. (1986). The structure of the nervous system of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 314, 1–340. doi:10.1098/rstb.1986.0056.
Williams, P. L., & Beer, R. D. (2010). Information dynamics of evolved agents. In S. Doncieux, B. Girard, A. Guillot, J. Hallam, J.-A. Meyer, & J.-B. Mouret (Eds.), From animals to animats 11: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior (pp. 38–49). Springer.
Wimsatt, W. C. (1986). Forms of aggregativity. In A. Donagan, A. N. Perovich, & M. V. Wedin (Eds.), Human nature and natural knowledge: Festschrift for Marjorie Grene (pp. 259–293). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Wright, C., & Bechtel, W. (2007). Mechanisms and psychological explanation. In P. Thagard (Ed.), Philosophy of psychology and cognitive science (pp. 31–79). New York: Elsevier.
Zednik, C. (2011). The nature of dynamical explanation. Philosophy of Science, 78(2), 238–263.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zednik, C. (2015). Heuristics, Descriptions, and the Scope of Mechanistic Explanation. In: Explanation in Biology. History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9822-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9822-8_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9821-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9822-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)